In modern society, most of the states are under the rule of government. The purpose of government is to maintain social order and seek for maximum benefit for human. However, the important issue that how human will develop under “state of nature” therefore came out to be discussed. The state of nature is a situation without government, employed in social contract theory in order to justify political authority. The device is most important in the works of the great contract theorists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, mainly Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/State_of_Nature.aspx). In this assignment, it will be talking about different perspectives of state of nature among Hobbes,
…show more content…
For Locke, he defined state of nature as “an original condition preceding the development of society, and describes it as a state in which all individuals are perfectly free and equal” (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). And under state of nature, law of nature dominate everything (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Law of nature was also considered to be rational, and declared that each individual should prevent from harming others’ liberty, property and well-beings (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Locke thought that if all individual obey to the natural law, social order will be peaceful and will not be like state of war as Hobbes stated (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Locke also claimed that human beings in the state of nature all have right to enforce law of nature, in order to maintain social order, those who broke the law of nature that tried to harm others’ liberty, property and well-beings can be punished by those who obey the law of nature (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). By comparing Hobbes’s theory of state of nature to Locke’s theory of state of nature, it can be seen that there are several different points and one similar point. The different point is that according to Hobbes, state of nature is referred as state of war, each individual did not trust others so that there were always conflict between human (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). However, Locke assumed that under state of nature, everyone should be treated equally, so that human live together peacefully (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Furthermore, another different point is that Hobbes’s civil government has absolute power, but Locke’s civil government does not have absolute power. For Locke, if
For Locke, he defined state of nature as “an original condition preceding the development of society, and describes it as a state in which all individuals are perfectly free and equal” (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). And under state of nature, law of nature dominate everything (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Law of nature was also considered to be rational, and declared that each individual should prevent from harming others’ liberty, property and well-beings (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Locke thought that if all individual obey to the natural law, social order will be peaceful and will not be like state of war as Hobbes stated (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Locke also claimed that human beings in the state of nature all have right to enforce law of nature, in order to maintain social order, those who broke the law of nature that tried to harm others’ liberty, property and well-beings can be punished by those who obey the law of nature (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). By comparing Hobbes’s theory of state of nature to Locke’s theory of state of nature, it can be seen that there are several different points and one similar point. The different point is that according to Hobbes, state of nature is referred as state of war, each individual did not trust others so that there were always conflict between human (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). However, Locke assumed that under state of nature, everyone should be treated equally, so that human live together peacefully (http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/secondtreatise.html). Furthermore, another different point is that Hobbes’s civil government has absolute power, but Locke’s civil government does not have absolute power. For Locke, if